Pedigree’s Statement on Natural Fibers in Kibble

It is unknown why this statement was not released to the general public, but Mars Petcare did issue a video statement to members of BlogPaws community (a pet bloggers community) regarding the “natural fibers” found in Pedigree.

Consumers have been reporting to Pedigree Pet Food, media, and social media that some of the “natural fibers” found in pet food don’t appear to be natural at all. Some consumers are stating the material they are finding in their Pedigree dog food are metal wire, and these wires are magnetized, sticking to magnets.

In response to consumer concern, Mars Petcare issued a video to the pet blogging community via BlogPaws. To my knowledge, Mars/Pedigree has not issued the same or similar statement to the general public. Because the video was sent to BlogPaws to share with its members, permission was not provided to share with the public. But…I can share with consumers exactly what Mars/Pedigree said.

The video setting was in a laboratory, Randy Ford, Food Safety Scientist, Mars Petcare was sitting in front of a microscope that included a camera display (similar to a computer monitor). His statement was…

“In recent days it has come to my attention that several of our customers have found unexplained substances protruding from their Pedigree kibble. We’ve asked consumers to share what they’ve seen so we can analyze. Putting it under a microscope, you can clearly see that these are in fact natural fibers. [At this point he puts a piece of kibble under the microscope and it displays on the screen.] In this case I can see that this is a hair from a meat or pork ingredient because it is segmented, you can actually see the segments here on the shaft itself. If it were a wire, this would be a solid piece and it would have a totally different appearance under the microscope. In this case this is magnified 100 times so I can clearly see it. In some cases this might be dark or black, but in this case it is white.”

“It’s not uncommon for natural fibers from beef and pork ingredients to appear in finished kibble and they pose absolutely no quality or safety concerns. They are completely safe for dogs to consume.”

“We’ve heard feedback from consumers that they are still concerned, some consumers have been testing their pet food with magnets. We do know that natural fibers can appear to take on magnetic properties, and there are a few reasons this can happen. First if you were to test these fibers in your own home with a magnet, depending on how much static electricity is present, it could produce enough energy to appear they are magnetized. It’s like rubbing a balloon against your hair and sticking it to a wall. Also there are different natural ingredients in our kibble like fats and oils which dogs need, and these ingredients can make the fibers sticky which gives the appearance of magnetic properties. Mars Petcare goes to great lengths to make sure metal does not appear in our pet food. We do hundreds of safety checks every single day at all of our factories and we now use cutting edge metal detection technology at all of our plants to check our food.”

“At Mars Petcare our customer satisfaction is as important as the high quality safe nutritious pet food that we produce for pets and their owners. One of the reasons I love working for Mars Petcare is because this company is so committed to quality pet food and is so passionate about pets. It’s what I do every day. We are pet owners. I am a pet owner, I have two dogs myself and I feed this product to my dogs. Each and every day we work to make a better world for pets. I hope I’ve been able to answer any questions that you have but if you have other questions please contact us.”

Comment20

As someone else who received the information via BlogPaws, I have to add how strange it was that the video was labeled “private” on its upper-left hand corner, and we were required to enter a password to view the video. What was the password they offered? “Science” Pshaw! This was pure PR spin gadget. They were hoping by sharing it with people who write about pets on a regular basis, they could get us to spread their manure for them.

While it is likely that the strands in the food are hair from some creature, this “scientist” from Mars completely misses the point. None of the consumers who wrote to them would find that acceptable, either. It’s gross and weird to find these things sticking out of the kibble. And the very fact that they received feedback should tell them their customers notice when a standard kibble changes significantly in some way. It makes all of us a little uneasy — and perhaps a little queasy, too.

Several years ago while I was in the animal science program at Texas A&M University, one of my professors told us that Purina had been accused of intentionally adding hair to feeds because during the Kjeldahl analysis to determine nitrogen content (which is then used to calculate protein content), the sulfuric acid would convert the hair proteins to total nitrogen, boosting the reported protein content. Too bad horses, cows, dogs and cats don’t digest hair. Wiki had a good article on this analysis.

I find it mind boggling that the company thinks this is no big deal. Let’s say this is pig or cow hair, how do we know that their feces is not also in the kibble. I am so glad I do not fed my dog this food. I guess the hair is just part of the “By-Products” they put in the food.

Ok… So BlogPaws won’t share to help consumers. It is very possible that the manufacturer provides funds to BlogPaws. Hmmm. We can get around that. Here’s the Youtube video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RC8MXouFvfY

Janie, You guessed correctly! I was poking around, clicking on links, and found myself on the Pedigree Facebook page.
On May 27th of this year, Pedigree posted this message: “We’re thrilled that Mars Petcare is the presenting sponsor of BlogPaws 2015! Will you be here this weekend? Stop by our booth to say hi!”

I’m not very internet savvy, not sure how to post links like some others here have done, but, there definitely is some financial connection between pedigree and BlogPaws!

The video Susan alerted us to was on the pedigree facebook page on August 21st, and I didn’t see any mention of the magnetism issue on the short video that I found. I don’t know when it was put on BlogPaws, and don’t know where else it might be posted. Obviously, BlogPaws is not in any hurry to alert unsuspecting consumers to ANY inkling that there might be a problem with pedigree, because there has been money changing hands between the two entities.

I keep thinking “this” is the last article I’m going to read on inferior commercial PF and then I quit!

However, in the last 24 hours there’s been a huge outcry over Huggies seemingly to have embedded glass in their baby wipes which of course has been denied by the company! At the same time (meaning during the very same news cycle, usually a 24 hour period) Pedigree got a mention on TV (with visuals) for the “strange fibers” in their dog food kibble which consumers have been noticing, which was easily excused by the company as no big deal, carry on. At least the issue made the News but the problem is that whatever explanation is provided by the very same company is also taken at face value. However people are being just a little more skeptical about Baby Wipes because of course that’s a human being related product so studies will continue! People really care about their “babies!”

I’ve been reading about these pet food issues for the past 8 years, meaning that “animal hair” in food is only the latest in a long list of serious controversies. Fortunately those who know enough to subscribe to the TAPF continue to be informed, and are able to make relative adjustments based on well researched information. Unfortunately there are millions of other consumers who know nothing (not only about TAPF) but about any issue that isn’t fully covered (meaning regarding both sides of an issue) on the “News.” Now that “animal hair” has been conveniently “explained” (I mean excused) of course by the very same company within the same news cycle then it’s just another PFI no big deal, just carry on, reveal. However curiously enough “Huggies” wasn’t excused quite that easily and more studies are promised to be conducted.

Until pet food consumers (as a group) rise up and demonstrate their concern we will continue to be hoodwinked into believing whatever we’re told. Everybody believes whatever commercial product they’ve “highly researched” and “chosen” for their precious pet is the very one is immune from all these production defects, but unless you’re feeding a homemade, human grade diet, not much else is really safeguarded. Nothing will change until people start speaking up for what they pay for, and demand the same kind of transparency that human grade products receive (like Huggies for example). Until that point in time comes, companion pets will continue to be considered as just another “animal” not much more deserving in terms of diet (meaning entitled to) than what “livestock feed” is currently being provided for them. Good luck with that. In the meantime please stop complaining until you are ready to take action in order to make a difference! After all we are the ONLY ones responsible for the well being of our companion pets!

Not much news here. It’s just little consumers up against a mega-corporation. So guess who wins again? Everybody seems satisfied with the company response of no big deal, carry on. Honest Investigative Reporters just don’t exist anymore.

Update: Regarding the white objects found inside and sticking straight out of many kibbles in a bag of Fromm Gold dry cat food, the company had this to say in their reply email: “From what you described, it is very likely it is just non-dissolved grain particles. This can happen occasionally but is very rare.”

I don’t believe this for a minute. These are straight, skinny things sticking straight out from the kibble. They look like fibers of some sort–either animal hair or fibers from perhaps a brush that is used in the production process.

They asked for info off the bag and photos if I could provide–which I will. They’ve offered to give me a one time redeemable voucher, which I appreciate, but that was not my intent when I contacted them. And I doubt that the online retailer I purchased it from would accept a voucher anyway.